Return on marketing spends

Return on marketing spends
Comment E-mail Print Share
First Published: Mon, Jul 14 2008. 11 56 PM IST
Updated: Mon, Jul 14 2008. 11 56 PM IST
Congratulations to Priyanka Mehra for her story in Monday’s Campaign (“Big spends, digital shift”) that has covered the topic from almost all angles. Many marketers have started taking serious long-term measures to improve the return on investment (RoI) of their marketing spends. Marketers such as Procter and Gamble (P&G) chairman A.G. Lafley believe that the retail outlet will become an important medium of communication, more so from an RoI perspective. The “Prism” study initiated by companies, including P&G, Coca-Cola, etc., points to the same direction. While there are many short-term solutions such as the ones mentioned in the article, there are many long-term solutions that are emerging to improve the top-line growth of organizations around the world.
— Biju Dominic
It is more than apparent that the demands of the Samajwadi Party (SP) of levying 20% windfall tax and cancelling the export-oriented unit status of private refineries are not prompted by its so-called service to the “common man”. These moves seem to be induced by its interest in serving its supporter Anil Ambani.
Seemingly, Amar Singh, on behalf of Anil, is attacking Mukesh Ambani by openly accusing petroleum minister Murli Deora of protecting the interests of Reliance Industries Ltd. The SP has also demanded help with regard to the auctioning of spectrum so that Anil gets the additional spectrum for his telecom operations.
The sibling rivalry is creeping into the political framework of our country. The SP and the Congress should not forgo the interest of the nation in pursuing their own selfish motives. In doing so, they will lose the faith of the citizens of the nation and come in the way of its progress.
- Meenakshi Gupta
What should worry us is not the strange Chinese ways of tendering invitations for the coming Olympics but the response thereto from our authorities (Jyoti Malhotra’s “China invites Sonia and not Manmohan Singh for Olympics”, Mint, 14 July).
Our topmost media man is not aware that his boss had not been invited for the Olympics; and (presumably our)?diplomat’s explanation: “China would have invited the Indian Prime Minister if they had known that he wanted to come.” Further comment is superfluous.
- S. Subramanyan
Re: P. Manoj’s article “Can Baalu do more before his time is up?” (Mint, 11 July) on the lackadaisical attitude of the minister vis-a-vis the crying needs of Indian shipping. His write-up has touched another chord in the hearts of the ailing road transport sector, which has just called off its nationwide strike on 4 July. The minister, who also happens to be the in-charge of road transport and highways, has invariably shown utter apathy to this important segment of economy. Had he listened to the woes of transporters, there would have been absolutely no need for the road transport strike.
His classic “nay-saying” act during talks with road transport representatives culminated in an unnecessary strike and huge loss to the country. He never met transporters on their problems and did not show up even on the occasion of an international conference on logistics hosted by the All India Transporters Welfare Association (Aitwa)—the apex body of Indian transporters — despite his acceptance to be the chief guest, resulting in embarrassment before foreign delegates. He also missed the 31st IRU Congress held in Istanbul which was attended by transport ministers of 70 countries.
The Indian delegation consisted of Aitwa president Ramesh and his wife Manju Agarwal, besides a deputy secretary of Baalu’s ministry, while China had more than 50 delegates, including the minister concerned. Aitwa bore its own expenses as the ministry wrote it won’t bear the expenses. So what can we expect from Baalu?
- O.P. Pareek, honorary adviser, Aitwa
Comment E-mail Print Share
First Published: Mon, Jul 14 2008. 11 56 PM IST